605 F. App'x 200
4th Cir.2015Background
- Kenneth DuShaun Fields, an employee at Clifton T. Perkins Hospital, sued under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act claiming disability discrimination for failure to provide a reasonable accommodation.
- Fields sought reassignment to a minimum-security wing position as his requested accommodation.
- The Hospital moved for summary judgment; the district court granted it, finding Fields failed to show a vacant position existed or that reassignment would have been reasonable.
- On appeal, Fields argued the Hospital denied a reasonable accommodation and failed to engage in the interactive process.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed de novo and affirmed, holding Fields did not meet his burden to produce evidence of an available, qualifying vacant position; the interactive-process claim likewise failed because no viable accommodation was shown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether employer failed to provide reasonable accommodation by not reassigning Fields | Fields: reassignment to a minimum-security position was a reasonable accommodation the Hospital should have provided | Hospital: no evidence a vacant, qualifying position existed and reassignment was not possible | Affirmed — plaintiff failed to show a vacant position for which he was qualified |
| Whether plaintiff met burden to show a vacant position existed | Fields: positions were available or should have been made available | Hospital: no vacant positions for which Fields was qualified; burden rests on plaintiff | Affirmed — plaintiff failed to meet burden of production on vacancy/qualification |
| Whether failure to engage in interactive process required judgment for plaintiff | Fields: Hospital’s lack of engagement prevented identification of accommodations | Hospital: even assuming lack of engagement, no accommodation was possible without an available position | Affirmed — interactive-process claim fails because no reasonable accommodation was shown as possible |
| Standard for summary judgment review | Fields: disputes of fact preclude summary judgment | Hospital: no genuine dispute of material fact; entitled to judgment as a matter of law | Affirmed — de novo review; no reasonable jury could find for plaintiff on record |
Key Cases Cited
- Walker v. Mod-U-Kraf Homes, LLC, 775 F.3d 202 (4th Cir. 2014) (standard for de novo review of summary judgment)
- Wilson v. Dollar Gen. Corp., 717 F.3d 337 (4th Cir. 2013) (elements of reasonable-accommodation claims and interactive-process requirements)
- EEOC v. Stowe-Pharr Mills, Inc., 216 F.3d 373 (4th Cir. 2000) (reassignment to a vacant position can be a reasonable accommodation)
- Hedrick v. W. Reserve Care Sys., 355 F.3d 444 (6th Cir. 2004) (no duty to reassign where no vacant position exists)
- Jackson v. City of Chicago, 414 F.3d 806 (7th Cir. 2005) (plaintiff bears burden to show existence of a vacant position)